Lesotho Highlands Development Authority v Malata (LC/REV 87 of 13) [2015] LSLC 42 (8 October 2015)

Lesotho Highlands Development Authority v Malata (LC/REV 87 of 13) [2015] LSLC 42 (8 October 2015)

By offering a renewal, even on less favourable terms, the employer raised the employee’s expectation of renewal and triggered the common law doctrine of legitimate expectation, requiring a fair hearing before making an adverse decision. The employer’s failure to respond to the employee’s queries and to afford a hearing before offering less favourable terms was unfair. However, due to the time lapse, reinstatement is impractical and compensation is more appropriate.

Citation
[2015] LSLC 42
Parties
Applicant: Lesotho Highlands Development Authority; 1st Respondent: Moeko Malata; 2nd Respondent: Directorate of Disputes Prevention and Resolution
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
8 October 2015
Case Number
LC/REV 87 of 13
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
review application dismissed
Legal Topics
Fixed Term Contracts, Non Renewal of Contract, Legitimate Expectation, Unfair Dismissal, Natural Justice, Audi Alteram Partem, Compensation Vs Reinstatement
Source Language
English
Employment Law Labour Law Fixed Term Contracts Non Renewal of Contract Legitimate Expectation Unfair Dismissal Natural Justice Audi Alteram Partem +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lesotho Highlands Development Authority

Applicant

Moeko Malata

1st Respondent

Directorate of Disputes Prevention and Resolution

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the non-renewal of a fixed-term contract with an offer of less favourable terms constitutes unfair dismissal
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of legitimate expectation applies in employment contracts without a renewal clause
  3. 3 Whether the employer was required to afford the employee a hearing before offering less favourable terms

Ratio Decidendi

By offering a renewal, even on less favourable terms, the employer raised the employee’s expectation of renewal and triggered the common law doctrine of legitimate expectation, requiring a fair hearing before making an adverse decision. The employer’s failure to respond to the employee’s queries and to afford a hearing before offering less favourable terms was unfair. However, due to the time lapse, reinstatement is impractical and compensation is more appropriate.

Court Disposition

review application dismissed

Orders

  • Parties to approach the DDPR for arguments and determination of appropriate compensation.
  • No order as to costs.